• n2burns@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    You comment is very confusing. I understand not supporting the gun restrictions introduced in the last 5 years, but why would you oppose the buyback program? If the government makes a citizen’s property illegal to own, they should compensate the citizen.

    All the data shows that law abiding gun owners aren’t much of the problem.

    FTFY. Also, the issue (generally) isn’t gun owners, it’s their guns that get stolen, misused, etc.

    Doubling down on this when we our sovereignty is threatented is just straight bonkers.

    Irrelevant and nonsensical. Individual gun owners have no impact on preserving our sovereignty. Modern militaries are on a different level than “A well regulated Militia” or whatever other 2A BS this is.

    • rabber@lemmy.caOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      Because it’s a waste of money. My taxes will have to pay for this.

      No one is using legally attained weapons to kill people. Spend the money on stopping guns coming across the border instead, and on better gun training programs. IMO it’s actually too easy to obtain a PAL and that should be made more strenuous.

      They plan on shipping the bought back guns to Ukraine which is also super embarassing. That would be a logistical nightmare. There’s a reason why armies use a standardized rifle/ammo haha. What is Ukraine going to do with my now illegal semi auto .22?

      Restricting weapons just props up the illegal market on them.

      • Nils@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        No one is using legally attained weapons to kill people.

        The problem is, they are using legally attained weapons to kill people.

        And every time they do, the news makes sure that it is described, and politicians use it as an argument for more restrict control and weird rules.

        They do that because it is easy, and it does not alienate their base and lobbyists. It does not mean it will solve the problem in the long term.

        Not so long ago, they banned a tamagotchi because thieves were using 15K USD devices to unlock cars.

        • rabber@lemmy.caOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 days ago

          Correct me if I’m wrong but wasn’t the last time a legal weapon killed people was the 1989 montreal one?

          • Nils@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            Montreal was a big one. I think the last big mass shootings were all smuggled from the USA, or stolen from the police (Nova Scotia 2020).

            I meant murder with guns in general. It feels like there is always a pundit saying the weapon being black, or having a handgun handle increases lethality… and red makes it faster, more dakka. It feels it is more for economic reasons (block competition) than to solve any real problem.

            There is this one in 2022, it is not as big, but the guy killed multiple people with legal handguns. https://siu.on.ca/en/directors_report_details.php?drid=2360

    • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      Modern militaries are on a different level than “A well regulated Militia” or whatever other 2A BS this is.

      Uh… Afghanistan would like to object?

      • n2burns@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        If you’re talking about the Taliban, I’d argue they are a full-blown military which just wasn’t attached to an internationally recognized government for ~2 decades. They had professional soldiers and equipment which would way out-class even the most intense private militia in the US.

      • rabber@lemmy.caOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        And switzerland but I guess they all have military training.

        • HonoredMule@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          The training is what we need to promote, for sure.

          I don’t have a firm enough position on gun control to want it costing us money right now.

          • rabber@lemmy.caOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 days ago

            I would actually support mandatory basic training. As long as they don’t make me cut my hair. Lol

            • HonoredMule@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              2 days ago

              Ditto on both points. I’m genuinely struggling with the prospect of having to shorten my beard if I joined the reserves. I’ve been working for years to train/develop it into a distinctive style and I’m not even there yet.

              • rabber@lemmy.caOP
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                2 days ago

                My hair is almost down to my ass and I wouldn’t cut it for any reason lol

        • Nils@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          Do you prefer the Switzerland bureaucracy than ours?

          Also, not sure how that helped them with…

          /Check notes on the Switzerland wars./

          Afghanistan war.

          • rabber@lemmy.caOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            Well more like nobody dares attack switzerland because it would be impossible. Everyone has a bunker and an assault rifle and they know how to use it.

            • Nils@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              They are also very friendly with everyone, try to stay neutral, and more important, hold the key to a lot of money.

              But they did not achieve that just by giving people guns, they teach it in schools, hold shooting competitions, lots of bureaucracy, and you can be charged for improper use of your equipment. Their society is not as divided, and they also have good support for their citizens.

              Looking around the world, the places that controlled gun violence well either banned or added more bureaucracy. But it appears that people prefer to go the Australian way.

      • Nils@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Sorry, I don’t follow, care to explain, please.

        Wasn’t the equipment and training they got to resist many invasions over the century, always from external groups? As far as I know, Afghani gun laws are very restrictive and bureaucratic.

          • Nils@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 days ago

            Not really sure where you read that statement, it was not what you quoted.

            But I don’t know of a nation that allows civilians to buy the equipment Afghanis used to resist Russia or USA.

            • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              Not really sure where you read that statement, it was not what you quoted.

              It is. It literally says “well regulated militia”.

              But I don’t know of a nation that allows civilians to buy the equipment Afghanis used to resist Russia or USA.

              Admittedly I don’t know what equipment they used, so can you give examples?

              • Nils@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 days ago

                Yeah, just infantry, we are talking about rocket launchers, anti-tank grenade launchers(RPG famously), LMG, manpads. Then you have things you can mount on a truck, then you have vehicles itself…

                You also have support from other countries and people, sharing resources, and intelligence. You do not resist USA or Russian with just a bunch of minutemen with walmart weapons. Even harder if they do not care for civilian lives.

                You might have some success disrupting some logistics in the partisan life, but not without a considerable support from modern military and allies.

                well regulated militia

                I might be wrong, but that person’s argument seems to be about the individual owner’s paper on preserving our sovereignty, independent of the calibre size.

                • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  Yeah, just infantry, we are talking about rocket launchers, anti-tank grenade launchers(RPG famously), LMG, manpads. Then you have things you can mount on a truck, then you have vehicles itself…

                  So admittedly I know next to nothing about this stuff, but you can make RPGs if you’re dedicated. The IRA did it. IEDs will also get you pretty far.

                  I might be wrong, but that person’s argument seems to be about the individual owner’s paper on preserving our sovereignty, independent of the calibre size.

                  By low-power I meant things you can get legally, so not sniper rifles and shit.

                  You also have support from other countries and people, sharing resources, and intelligence. You do not resist USA or Russian with just a bunch of minutemen with walmart weapons. Even harder if they do not care for civilian lives.

                  You might have some success disrupting some logistics in the partisan life, but not without a considerable support from modern military and allies.

                  The Irish and Algerians did it.

    • Nils@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      Modern militaries are on a different level than “A well regulated Militia” or whatever other 2A BS this is.

      .22 will be useless and they start shelling us.

      I feel like anyone LARPing or dreaming with military campaign would be better served by practicing with RC planes and drones, tanking cool pictures, breathtaking videos, or just doing cool aerial tricks.

      • rabber@lemmy.caOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        I’m an experienced drone pilot and that’s how I would plan to contribute.

        The Canadian Rangers use tikka t3x rifles which we can still legally buy. In the event of war you probably want something that can fire 7.62 NATO as that will be the ammo which is distributed.

        Canada is mostly wilderness. A bolt action rifle still has a place in your pack. It is reliable and simple. Lightweight.

        • Nils@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          My 80yo father-in-law has some drones, he will be more useful than me, I should probably save for a good one and start practicing.

          Found some tikka t3x on the used listing here, I was trying to find their brochure to see which model they recommend for conversion to 7.62, I imagine a .308 Win would work.